Candidates and Healthcare — A Guide to the Maryland Primary

Jane Jewell • July 5, 2022


Abortion and covid are the main and most controversial topics in health care, dominating today’s news and people’s minds. 

 

Do candidates agree with the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade? Or do they support reproductive freedom and the right of individual women to choose? And, where do candidates stand on the issues of masks, mandates, and vaccines.

 

Other important health-related issues include the increasing cost of prescription drugs and health insurance premiums. Arguments also swirl around whether to expand or curb Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare). The increasing number of hospital and clinic closings, especially in rural areas, is another problem.

 

Below are notes and quotes from the candidates’ websites and other public-record sources. Some candidates, mostly Democrats, have detailed plans for handling today’s health problems. Other candidates’ websites have general statements about healthcare being important, but no specifics on what the candidate supports or opposes.


For those interested in a candidate’s stand on a health issue that is not noted below, we suggest searching on the candidate’s name along with the topic and also checking sites like VOTE411.org or Ballotpedia.org/Maryland that track candidates’ positions. Many who have not yet made public statements on various controversial issues like the pandemic or Roe v. Wade may yet do so before the Maryland primary election. Be sure to vote!

 

The primary election is scheduled for Tuesday, July 19. Only residents who have registered their political party preference are eligible to vote, and they may only vote for their party’s candidates. Thus, Democrats may only vote for Democratic candidates and Republicans only for Republican candidates.

 

Important primary voting dates in Maryland:

  • July 7-14: Early in-person voting
  • July 12: Deadline to request a mail-in ballot for the primary election
  • July 19: Mail-in ballots must be postmarked no later than this date
  • July 19: Primary election

 

 

Governor/Lieutenant Governor

 

Dan Cox + Gordana Schifanelli — Republican

www.dancoxforgovernor.com

 

“On day one of my administration as your next governor, I will end the vaccine and health mandates.”

 

“Life, from conception to death, must be protected with utmost sincerity. I am unashamedly 100% pro-life.”

 

 

Robin Ficker + LeRoy F. Yegge, Jr. — Republican

www.cutmdsalestax2cents.com

Ficker’s website lists his record and position on many areas, but hardly anything on health. Some of his stance can be inferred from statements on education on his website including his call to re-open schools for in-person learning as early as July 2020 and that, “They will prioritize parental input into what the schools are teaching, whether schools are safe, and whether any mandates are ever needed.”

 

“I want to make Maryland the sports state. Kids in the school systems and most adults are too sedentary, devoting too much time to screen activity. We need to get them out and about and involved in wholesome activity and exercise.” (VOTE411.org)

 

 

Kelly Schulz + Jeff Woolford — Republican

http://www.kellyschulzforgovernor.com

“... it is WELL past time we move away from mask mandates and vaccine mandates. Individuals should be making their own choices.”

 

“I won’t let politicians arbitrarily shut down schools.”

 

“We are blessed to live in a state that has some of the best hospitals and health care providers not only in the country, but in the world. Innovative approaches have been taken to stabilize health care costs and premiums. We must continue to do this while also allowing for a system in which we can have more competition so that consumers have more choices.”

 

 

Joe Werner + Minh Thanh Luong — Republican

http://www.wernerformaryland.com

Werner’s website states that he has “tailor-fit plans” on several issues including healthcare; however, there are no details on the plans. His stance is indicated by the phrase “Pro Life Pro Liberty” on his list of important issues.

 


Rushern Baker III + Nancy Navarro — Democrat

http://www.rushernbaker.com

Rushern Baker III suspended his race for governor on June 10.

 

 

Jon Baron + Natalie Williams — Democrat

http://www.jonbaron.com

Baron says that he wants to bring an evidence-based approach to all issues including education, the economy, and healthcare. Specifically, he wants to lower the cost of prescription drugs by empowering Maryland to negotiate lower statewide costs for pharmaceutical drugs and to investigate which drugs benefit patients. 

 

Programs he supports:

  • Enshrine the protections of Roe v. Wade in the Maryland constitution
  • Public option health insurance with low premiums, similar to programs in New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington, similar to single-payer or Medicare-for-all concepts
  • Nurse-led program for chronically ill home-bound senior citizens
  • Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP) for first-time mothers
  • A program that pairs Black barbershops with pharmacists to screen for and treat high blood pressure

 

 

Peter Franchot + Monique Anderson-Walker — Democrat

http://www.franchot.com

 “We have suffered greatly as a state and as a nation because our leaders have confused wishful thinking and good intentions with good management and strategic leadership. As a result, millions of Marylanders experienced confusion, frustration, and anger over poor execution of our covid-19 response. Far too often, the pandemic created needs that government did not rise to meet.”

 

Healthcare platform includes:

  • Protecting and expanding access to abortion care
  • Lowering healthcare costs and expanding affordable primary and preventative care

 

 

Douglas F. Gansler + Candace Hollingsworth — Democrat

www.ganslerformaryland.com

Regarding healthcare in general, Ganzler states: “In the midst of both a public health crisis and an economic crisis, our state is failing to provide the access, quality, and continuity of care that patients desperately need.”

 

Gansler has a focus on mental health and on adults with physical disabilities and chronic diseases, especially veterans. He proposes plans to improve access for the disabled in public transportation and employment. 

 

“We are nowhere close to satisfying demand for psychiatrists, therapists, and clinical social workers, which means people who call for help are often forced to wait weeks, even months, to get through the door. When we can get patients in for sessions, we don’t have nearly enough licensed prescribers to provide people with life-saving medicine. It’s clear Marylanders need mental health care now more than ever.”

 

He is also in favor of legalizing cannabis and expunging convictions.

 

 

Ralph W. Jaffe + Mark Greben — Democrat

http://www.fedupwithcrookedpolitics.com

Jaffe wants investigation and action on:

  • Veteran Adminstration scandals
  • Nursing home exploitation of the elderly

 

 

Ashwani Jain + LaTrece Hawkins Lytes — Democrat

www.jainforgovernor.com

Jain pledges to:

  • Add protection for abortion care, contraception, and gender treatment to Maryland constitution
  • Provide mental health personnel in schools
  • Strengthen disability rights and create caretaker programs
  • Legalize marijuana and expunge records
  • Decriminalize scheduled drugs and fund rehab clinics

 

 

John King + Michelle Daugherty Siri — Democrat

http://www.johnkingforGovernor.com

King is endorsed by the Pro-Choice Maryland Action organization.

 

On protecting and expanding the right to abortion care, King’s website states: “Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, it is no longer enough for Democrats to only be pro-choice. John and Michelle, his running mate and former board president of Planned Parenthood of Maryland, are committed to aggressively protecting and expanding the right to abortion care in Maryland.”

 

“Almost 350,000 [Marylanders] are uninsured. The disparities in Maryland’s healthcare system run deep. Black and Latino Marylanders are uninsured at a disproportionate rate.”

 

On his website, King outlines the following priorities:

  • Treat healthcare as a human right and remove barriers to healthcare for all Marylanders, regardless of immigration status
  • Remove barriers to primary care providers and specialty providers while working to ensure that all Marylanders face no barriers to emergency care, especially in rural Maryland
  • Incentivize providers to locate in underserved communities, prioritizing specialists
  • Create a permanent task force to analyze racial disparities in Maryland’s health care system, and make targeted investments to eliminate those disparities
  • Take a holistic approach to healthcare by tackling the underlying causes of many health disparities, such as poverty, environmental injustice, and access to fresh foods

 

 

Wes Moore + Aruna Miller — Democrat

wesmoore.com

“Wes will protect funding for our community health centers that offer critical health services like cancer screenings and birth control. Wes supports the right to choose, and as governor, he will fight to protect it."

 

The website states that the Moore-Miller administration will:

  • Ensure every Marylander has access to quality, affordable health care coverage and that the ability to pay is not the deciding factor in obtaining needed care
  • Protect reproductive freedoms and advance access to reproductive healthcare by enshrining the right to abortion into Maryland’s constitution, combating any efforts to restrict care and expanding training for healthcare providers so more Marylanders can obtain care
  • Lower prescription drug prices by empowering the Prescription Drug Affordability Board to review costs and set limits for prescription drugs, explore bulk buying pools, and leverage the state’s purchasing power to drive down costs
  • Advance health equity by ensuring universal access to coverage, combating maternal mortality by expanding successful home visiting programs, addressing disparities in rural health care by expanding telehealth and remote patient monitoring
  • Improve care for individuals with disabilities, and support seniors’ ability to access home health care services to age in place
  • Destigmatize mental illness and support mental, emotional, and behavioral health for all by increasing the number of community-based care centers
  • Better address the behavioral health needs of Maryland’s youth by expanding community schools, increasing the number of behavioral health workers in schools
  • Address workforce shortages in the health care field by driving more students into STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) programs and leveraging tuition assistance and loan forgiveness to incentivize students and new graduates to work in high-demand areas
  • Address the public health impacts of climate change by addressing the worsening effects of extreme heat and improving Maryland’s air quality


 

Tom Perez + Shannon Sneed — Democrat

www.tomperez.com

“Tom will also ensure that every woman in Maryland has access to world class reproductive care.


  • The Perez-Sneed administration will also tackle the opioid and overdose crises across our state which are the leading cause of maternal mortality
  • Tom has a proven track record of fighting for women’s reproductive rights, including as assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice where he reinforced federal laws that protect women’s access to reproductive care without harassment or intimidation
  • Maryland is one of the most pro-choice states in the nation, but unfortunately most counties do not have a clinic that provides abortion services. Tom is committed to ensuring that every woman in Maryland has access to reproductive healthcare by integrating reproductive health services into our primary care system
  • Tom has a track record of fighting for Black women and children as director of the Office of Civil Rights at the Department of Health and Human Services where he prosecuted a maternity ward that segregated its patients by race. As governor, Tom will provide targeted support for fertility, prenatal, and postpartum resources to Black women
  • Perez states he will also tackle the ongoing mental health crisis”

 

 

Jerome M. Segal + Justinian M. Dispenza — Democrat

segalforgovernor.org

Segal’s website has no specific mention of healthcare, covid, or abortion and reproductive rights.

 

 

Congress 1st District

 

Andrew P. Harris — Republican — incumbent

http://www.andyharris.com

Concerning abortion, Harris has been quoted in a Baltimore Sun article: “I’m on record,” Harris said. “I would support a heartbeat bill. I think we should protect infant lives after the heartbeat is detected.” That would be at about 6 weeks, before many even know they are pregnant.

 

As of July 1, the Harris website has lots of links to news articles and tips for dealing with covid but no details on his position on issues such as masks, vaccines, or mandates. Radio and TV ads from 2018 and 2020 are included but no new information for 2022.

 

The site also has a banner proclaiming “The Trump Team.” 

 

 

R. David Harden — Democrat

http://www.hardenforcongress.com

“Healthcare: Every American deserves access to high-quality, affordable medical care. We can improve our healthcare system while lowering costs, ensuring broader coverage, and achieving better outcomes. I support measures that would strengthen the ACA’s framework and provide a public option that will be made affordable to every citizen. Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP protect our seniors, children, and most vulnerable citizens; I will fight to make sure these programs are never eliminated or privatized. Beyond expanding coverage, we must also seek to address the exploding costs of healthcare. We need a comprehensive policy agenda that targets anti-competitive behavior, price-gouging, and bureaucratic waste in the private sector, while also investing in evidence-based public health initiatives.”

 

Hardin states that he is “fully committed to protecting Social Security and Medicare and ensuring their solvency and viability.”

 

On covid, Hardin supports vaccines and taking all needed precautions for those in high-risk groups.

 

 

Heather R. Mizeur — Democrat

www.heathermizeur.com

Concerning healthcare, Mizeur supports expanding access, lowering costs, and improving coverage. She has considerable experience in writing and sponsoring healthcare policy in the Maryland General Assembly, including one of the first bills that allowed young people to stay on their parents’ family policies until age 26.

 

“I will seek to expand who qualifies for coverage, improve the benefits packages, and will work to bring down out-of-pocket costs through better subsidies and co-payment rules. I also support allowing Medicare to negotiate directly with drug companies to reduce Rx prices. And I will prioritize our rural health care needs by focusing on ways to attract more and better health care providers to our region and promote policies that will keep rural hospitals and clinics open and thriving, ensuring First District residents don’t lose their access to care.”

 

Mizeur has an impressive list of endorsements including from Maryland’s U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen and from Wayne Gilchrest, former Republican, who was the First District representative in Congress for many years. 

 

 

Jane Jewell is a writer, editor, photographer, and teacher. She has worked in news, publishing, and as the director of a national writer's group. She lives in Chestertown with her husband Peter Heck, a ginger cat named Riley, and a lot of books.

 

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

Democrats Ambushed in Hurlock Election

By CSES Staff • November 4, 2025
Voters in Hurlock have delivered sweeping changes in this year’s municipal election, as Republican and GOP-aligned candidates won key races there. The results mark a setback for Democrats and a significant political shift in a community that has historically leaned Democratic in state and federal contests. The outcome underscores how local organizing and turnout strategies can have an outsized impact in small-town elections. Analysts also suggest that long-term party engagement in municipal contests could shape voter alignment in future county and state races. Political analysts warn that ignoring municipal elections and ceding them to the GOP could hurt the Maryland Democratic Party in statewide politics. Turnout increased by approximately 17% compared with the 2021 municipal election, reflecting heightened local interest in the mayoral and council races. Incumbent Mayor Charles Cephas, a Democrat, was soundly defeated by At-Large Councilmember Earl Murphy, who won with roughly 230 votes to Cephas’s 144. In the At-Large Council race, Jeff Smith, an independent candidate backed by local Republicans, secured a 15-point win over Cheyenne Chase. In District 2, Councilmember Bonnie Franz, a Republican, was re-elected by 40 percentage points over challenger Zia Ashraf, who previously served on the Dorchester Democratic Central Committee. The only Democrat to retain a seat on the council was David Higgins, who was unopposed. The Maryland Republican Party invested resources and campaign attention in the Hurlock race, highlighting it on statewide social media and dispatching party officials, including Maryland GOP Chair Nicole Beus Harris, to campaign. Local Democrats emphasized support for Mayor Cephas through the Dorchester County Democratic Central Committee, but the Maryland Democratic Party did not appear to participate directly.

Giordano Sides with Ehrlich Over Hogan, Underscoring GOP Rift as Moore Widens Lead

By CSES Staff • November 4, 2025
In what political observers are calling a clear break from Maryland’s moderate Republican establishment, Wicomico County Executive Julie Giordano chose former Gov. Bob Ehrlich — not former Gov. Larry Hogan — as the guest of honor at her re-election fundraiser in late October. Billed as Giordano’s annual Harvest Party, her event drew conservative activists from across the lower Eastern Shore and featured Ehrlich as keynote speaker. This was immediately read by insiders as a signal that Giordano will embrace the party’s right-wing base ahead of 2026, distancing herself from Hogan’s more centrist, bipartisan image. “Bringing in Bob Ehrlich instead of Larry Hogan wasn’t accidental,” one longtime Republican strategist said. “It shows Giordano wants to plant her flag with the MAGA-aligned wing of the party, the same voters who now dominate Maryland’s Republican primary base.” Hogan, who has hinted at another run for governor, was notably absent from this year’s Tawes Crab and Clam Bake in Somerset County, a high-profile gathering long considered essential for statewide contenders. Coupled with Giordano’s public alignment with Ehrlich, Hogan’s absence has fueled speculation that his influence within Maryland’s GOP is slipping. Those doubts were amplified by new polling data. A statewide survey commissioned by the Baltimore Banner found Gov. Wes Moore (D) leading Hogan 45% to 37% in a hypothetical 2026 matchup, with 14% undecided. The poll, conducted by phone and web from Oct. 7–10 among more than 900 registered voters, carries a margin of error of 3.2 percentage points. The results suggest that while Hogan remains popular among moderates and independents, Moore continues to hold a firm advantage statewide, particularly among Democrats and younger voters. Giordano’s decision to align herself with Ehrlich rather than Hogan further illustrates the ideological divide defining Maryland Republicans heading into 2026. As the party drifts further to the right, analysts say Hogan’s brand of pragmatic centrism may no longer have a natural home in today’s GOP. For now, Ehrlich’s appearance in Salisbury is being seen as a symbolic moment, one that cements Giordano’s status as a leading figure in the state’s Trump-aligned movement and underscores how quickly the political winds have shifted. For Hogan, once seen as the Republican best positioned to reclaim the governor’s office, that shift may mark the end of an era.

New Congressional Map for Maryland and District 1?

By Jan Plotczyk • November 4, 2025
Can Maryland create a new congressional map that will flip the state’s sole Republican district to the Democrats? Gov. Wes Moore has created a Governor's Redistricting Advisory Commission to consider mid-cycle redistricting and Maryland has jumped into the redistricting fray. The commission will conduct public hearings, solicit public feedback, and present recommendations to the governor and Maryland General Assembly. “My commitment has been clear from day one — we will explore every avenue possible to make sure Maryland has fair and representative maps,” said Moore. “And we also need to make sure that, if the president of the United States is putting his finger on the scale to try to manipulate elections because he knows that his policies cannot win in a ballot box, then it behooves each and every one of us to be able to keep all options on the table to ensure that the voters’ voices can actually be heard .” Moore’s commission is one of those options — a response to Trump’s call to Republican-led states to create more GOP House districts before the 2026 midterm elections. Three GOP states — Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina — have completed a Trump gerrymander for a gain of seven seats and three more states — Indiana, Utah, and Ohio — could create new maps with a total of four additional Republican seats. That would make 11, should they withstand challenges. Democratic-led states made a lot of noise at first about countering these GOP efforts, but only California and Virginia have campaigns for new maps underway. California wants to flip five seats and Virginia hopes for up to four. Optimistically, that could add up to as many as nine. Maryland’s goal would be to add one Democratic seat. Other states on both sides could soon follow, in some cases taking advantage of existing redistricting deadlines or ongoing litigation. Maryland State Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Balto City) is not in favor of mid-cycle redistricting, calling it too dicey. “Simply put, it is too risky and jeopardizes Maryland’s ability to fight against the radical Trump administration. At a time where every seat in Congress matters, the potential for ceding yet another one to Republicans here in Maryland is simply too great,” Ferguson wrote in a letter to Senate Democrats. Rep. Andrew P. Harris (R-MD01), whose district would be targeted by redistricting, called the effort "the most partisan thing you could do." He whined, “It just wouldn’t be fair.” Harris warned that any redistricting could backfire on the Democrats. “We will take this to court, it will go as high as necessary, and in the end, a judge could draw a map that actually has two or three Republican congressmen,” Harris said. “I’d caution the Democrats, be careful what you wish for.” Harris and his wife, Maryland GOP Chair Nicole Beus Harris, have perhaps already worked out a strategy. The Governor’s Redistricting Advisory Commission, last constituted by Gov. Martin O’Malley in 2011, will begin its work this month. The five-member commission includes: Chair: Senator Angela Alsobrooks Senate President Bill Ferguson or designee Speaker Adrienne A. Jones or designee Former Attorney General Brian Frosh Cumberland Mayor Ray Morriss “We have a president that treats our democracy with utter contempt. We have a Republican party that is trying to rig the rules in response to their terrible polling,” said Sen. Alsobrooks. “Let me be clear: Maryland deserves a fair map that represents the will of the people. That’s why I’m proud to chair this commission. Our democracy depends on all of us standing up in this moment.” Will Maryland’s First District finally be competitive? Can we at long last replace “AWOL Andy” Harris? Stay tuned…. Jan Plotczyk spent 25 years as a survey and education statistician with the federal government, at the Census Bureau and the National Center for Education Statistics. She retired to Rock Hall.

Residents Turn Out for Offshore Wind Information Session

By CSES Staff • November 4, 2025
In strong numbers, local residents turned out last month for a community information session on offshore wind hosted by the Alliance for Offshore Wind at the Ocean Pines library. The forum heard from industry experts, environmental advocates, and labor leaders to discuss how offshore wind projects can support jobs, clean energy, and coastal resilience along Maryland’s Eastern Shore. Featured were Sam Saluto of Oceantic, Jim Strong of the United Steelworkers, Ron Larsen of Sea Ink Solutions, and Jim Brown of the Audubon Society, all of whom emphasized the long-term environmental and economic benefits of wind development off Maryland’s coast. Speakers outlined how the project, once completed, is expected to create hundreds of high-paying jobs, generate clean power for tens of thousands of homes, and reduce reliance on fossil fuels that cause pollution and coastal erosion. “The potential here is extraordinary,” said Saluto, highlighting Oceantic’s ongoing work to ensure safety and sustainability standards remain at the highest level. “We’re not just talking about wind turbines. We’re talking about revitalizing local economies and protecting the Shore’s way of life.” Union representative Jim Strong echoed that sentiment, noting that Maryland’s labor community sees offshore wind as a chance to rebuild domestic manufacturing capacity while giving workers access to strong wages and long-term stability. Environmental voices, including Jim Brown of the Audubon Society, focused on how properly sited wind projects can reduce carbon emissions while coexisting with marine wildlife and migratory bird patterns. While most of the evening centered on data and community questions, the event briefly turned tense when Ocean City Mayor Rick Meehan, who is leading a lawsuit challenging Maryland’s offshore wind plans, attempted to question the panel. The mayor appeared to lose his train of thought mid-sentence and later cast doubt on the reality of climate change, drawing visible concern from several attendees. Meehan, a New Yorker who moved to Ocean City in 1971 and has held public office since 1985, has become one of the region’s most vocal opponents of offshore wind. His critics argue the lawsuit represents an effort to stall progress rather than engage with the facts presented by energy, labor, and environmental experts. Despite the brief exchange, the overall tone of the evening was forward-looking. Residents lingered after the formal discussion to review informational materials, speak with industry representatives, and learn about opportunities for community involvement. For many, the message was clear: Maryland’s transition to clean energy is not only feasible, it’s already underway, and the Eastern Shore stands to benefit.

Mayor Randy Taylor Moves to Dismantle Salisbury’s Housing First Program, Undermining Proven Strategy for Ending Homelessness

By CSES Staff • October 24, 2025
 Sparking alarm among housing advocates, social workers, and residents, Salisbury Mayor Randy Taylor has announced plans to gut Salisbury’s nationally recognized Housing First program, signaling a break from years of bipartisan progress on homelessness. Created in 2017 under then-Mayor Jacob Day, the initiative was designed around a simple but powerful principle: that stable, permanent housing must come first before residents can address problems with employment, health, or recovery. The program was designed to provide supportive housing for Salisbury’s most vulnerable residents — a model backed by decades of national data showing it reduces homelessness, saves taxpayer dollars, and lowers strain on emergency services. But under Taylor’s leadership, that vision appears to be ending. In a letter to residents, the City of Salisbury announced that the Housing First program will be shut down in 2027, in effect dismantling one of the city’s long-term programs to prevent homelessness. Taylor says he plans to “rebrand” the program as a temporary “gateway to supportive housing,” shifting focus away from permanent stability and toward short-term turnover. “We’re trying to help more people with the same amount of dollars,” Taylor said. Critics call that reasoning deeply flawed, and dangerous. Former Mayor Jacob Day, who helped launch the initiative, says that Housing First was always intended to be permanent supportive housing, not a revolving door. National studies show that when cities replace permanent housing programs with short-term placements, people end up right back on the streets, and that costs taxpayers more in emergency medical care, policing, and crisis intervention. Local advocates warn that Taylor’s move will undo years of progress. “This isn’t just a policy shift, it’s a step backward,” one social service worker said. “Housing First works because it’s humane and cost-effective. This administration is turning it into a revolving door to nowhere.” Even some community partners who agree the program needs better oversight say that Taylor is missing the point. Anthony Dickerson, Executive Director of Salisbury’s Christian Shelter, said the city should be reforming and strengthening its approach, not abandoning its foundation. Under Taylor’s proposal, participants could be limited to one or two years in housing before being pushed out, whether or not they’re ready. Advocates fear this change could push vulnerable residents back into instability, undoing the progress the city was once praised for. While Taylor touts his plan as a way to “help more people,” critics say it reflects a troubling pattern in his administration: cutting programs that work. For years, Salisbury’s Housing First initiative has symbolized compassion and evidence-based leadership and has stood as a rare example of a small city tackling homelessness with dignity and results. Now, as Taylor moves to end it, residents and advocates are asking a simple question: Why would a mayor tear down one of Salisbury’s most successful programs for helping people rebuild their lives?

John Roberts Is 20

By John Christie • October 24, 2025
On the first Monday of October, the Supreme Court began a new term, Term 2025 as it is officially called. The day also marked John Roberts’ 20 years as Chief Justice of what history will clearly record as the Roberts Court. Twenty years is a long time but at this point, Roberts is only the fourth longest serving Chief Justice in our history. John Marshall, the fourth and longest, served for 34 years, 152 days (1801–35). Roger Brooke Taney, served for 28 years, 198 days (1836–64). Melville Fuller, served 21 years, 269 days (1888 to 1910). John Roberts was originally nominated by George W. Bush to fill the seat held by the retiring Sandra Day O’Connor but, upon the unexpected death of William Rehnquist, Bush instead nominated Roberts to serve as Chief Justice. His nomination was greeted by enthusiasm and high hopes in many quarters. He was young, articulate, personable, and highly qualified, having had an impressive academic record, experience in the Reagan administration and the private bar, and service on the federal D.C. Court of Appeals for two years. His “balls and strikes” comment at his confirmation hearing struck many as suggesting judicial independence. He sounded as well very much like an institutionalist, having said at an early interview that “it would be good to have a commitment on the part of the Court to act as a Court.” Whatever else might be said 20 years later about the tenure of John Roberts as Chief Judge, the Supreme Court is no doubt much less popular and much more divisive today than it was on September 29, 2005, when he was sworn in as the 17th Chief Justice by Justice John Paul Stevens, then the Court’s most senior associate justice, and witnessed by his sponsor, George W. Bush. Gallup’s polling data shows popular support for the Court now at the lowest levels since they started measuring it. In July 2025, a Gallup poll found that, for the first time in the past quarter-century, fewer than 40% of Americans approved of the Supreme Court’s performance. According to Gallup, one major reason that approval of the Supreme Court has been lower is that its ratings have become increasingly split along party lines — the current 65-point gap in Republican (79%) and Democratic (14%) approval of the court is the largest ever. The legal scholar Rogers Smith wrote in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science in June, “Roberts’s tenure as Chief Justice has led to the opposite of what he has said he seeks to achieve. The American public now respects the Court less than ever and sees it as more political than ever.” These results signify more than simply a popularity poll because a Court without broad public support is a Court that will not have the same public respect upon which their most important decisions have historically depended. And, whatever the reasons for this development, it has happened on John Roberts’s watch. There is no better example of the current divisiveness on the Court than the remarkable string of “emergency” rulings on the Court’s so-called shadow docket since January 20. The extent of ideological and partisan differences has been sharp and extreme. The conservative majority’s votes have frequently been unexplained, leaving lower court judges to have to puzzle the decision’s meaning and leaving the public to suspect partisan influences. And the results of these shadow docket rulings have had enormous, sometimes catastrophic, consequences: Removing noncitizens to countries to which they had no ties or faced inhumane conditions Disqualifying transgender service members Firing probationary federal workers and independent agency heads Ending entire governmental departments and agencies without congressional approval Allowing the impounding of foreign aid funds appropriated by Congress Releasing reams of personal data to the Department of Government Efficiency Allowing immigration raids in California based on racial and ethnic profiling John Roberts has written many Supreme Court opinions in his 20 years as Chief Justice. At the 20-year mark, the most important, to the nation and to his legacy, will likely be his opinion in the Trump immunity case, which changed the balance of power among the branches of government, tipping heavily in the direction of presidential power. Trump v. United States (2024). In her dissent from his majority opinion in that case, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, warned about the consequences of such a broad expansion of presidential power. “The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the president,” upsetting the status quo that had existed since the nation’s founding and giving blanket permission for wrongdoing. “Let the president violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law.” Roberts claimed in his majority opinion that the “tone of chilling doom” in Sotomayor’s dissent was “wholly disproportionate” to what the ruling meant. However, Sotomayor’s words have proved prescient: the breadth of power that Trump and his administration have asserted in the months since he was sworn in for his second term has made plain how boundlessly they now interpret the reach of the presidency in the wake of the Roberts opinion. Despite the early “balls and strikes” comment, the assessment of John Roberts’ long term judicial record suggests something different as seen by several distinguished legal commentators from significantly different perspectives. As summarized by Lincoln Caplan, a senior research scholar at Yale Law School, in a new retrospective article on Robert’s 20-year tenure, “From his arrival on the Court until now, his leadership, votes, and opinions have mainly helped move the law and the nation far to the right. An analysis prepared by the political scientists Lee Epstein, Andrew Martin, and Kevin Quinn found that in major cases, the Roberts Court’s record is the most conservative of any Supreme Court in roughly a century.” “What Trump Means for John Roberts's Legacy,” Harvard Magazine , October 8, 2025. Steve Vladeck, Georgetown Law Center professor and a regularly incisive Court commentator, characterized the 20-year Roberts’ Court as follows: “The ensuing 20 years has featured a Court deciding quite a lot more than necessary — inserting itself into hot-button social issues earlier than necessary (if it was necessary at all); moving an array of previously settled statutory and constitutional understandings sharply to the right; and, over the past decade especially, running roughshod over all kinds of procedural norms that previously served to moderate many of the justices’ more extreme impulses.” “The Roberts Court Turns Twenty,” One First , September 29, 2025. In another remarkable new article by a widely respected conservative originalist, similar concerns about the present Court have very recently been expressed. Caleb Nelson, who teaches at the University of Virginia and is a former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas, has written that the text of the Constitution and the historical evidence surrounding it in fact grant Congress broad authority to shape the executive branch, including by putting limits on the president’s power to fire people. “Must Administrative Officers Serve at the President’s Pleasure?” Democracy Project, NYU LAW , September 29, 2025. When the First Congress confronted similar ambiguities in the meaning of the Constitution, asserts Nelson, “more than one member warned against interpreting the Constitution in the expectation that all presidents would have the sterling character of George Washington.” Nelson continues, “The current Supreme Court may likewise see itself as interpreting the Constitution for the ages, and perhaps some of the Justices take comfort in the idea that future presidents will not all have the character of Donald Trump. But the future is not guaranteed; a president bent on vengeful, destructive, and lawless behavior can do lasting damage to our norms and institutions.” John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes. 
Show More